AFTER THE WAR: SECURITY COUNCIL; U.S. Presses U.N. Members To Bear More of Iraq Burden

Using the bombing of the United Nations headquarters in Baghdad as a rallying cry, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell sought today to build support for a new Security Council resolution that would persuade other major nations to contribute more troops and aid to secure and rebuild Iraq under the aegis of the American-led occupation.

His appeal was not rejected out of hand by any Council members, but it met with a wary response from Germany and Russia and an icy rebuke from France.

Emerging from a meeting with Secretary General Kofi Annan this morning, Mr. Powell told reporters that ''We're looking at, of course, reaffirming our determination to succeed in Iraq. We're looking forward to language that might call on member states to do more.''

Shortly afterward, France's deputy ambassador, Michel Duclos, told a Security Council meeting that the economic and political reconstruction of Iraq will not succeed if Washington insists on maintaining sole control of the process. ''Sharing the burden and responsibility in a world of equal and sovereign nations also means sharing information and authority,'' Mr. Duclos said.

While condemning the terrorist attack, he asked a rhetorical question: ''Would we be in this state if there had been set up at the outset a genuine international partnership?'' He also called for the return of United Nations weapons inspectors, noting that the failure of allied forces to find unconventional weapons was especially troubling, since it might mean that they were available to terrorists.

The French reception was a reminder of the risks that Mr. Powell has assumed in trying, in the wake of the bombing, to sell the Security Council and potential troop contributors like Pakistan, Turkey and India, on a position that previously had been unacceptable to most of them. The demands of the potential donors for a degree of military autonomy runs afoul of the Pentagon's insistence on unified command and control, particularly in an environment as chaotic as central Iraq.

Mr. Annan raised the possibility of a multinational force under the mandate of the United Nations, along the lines of what was done in Afghanistan. While reiterating the necessity of a central command structure, the British envoy, Sir Emyr Jones Parry, said late in the day, ''Whether or not there is some other way of bringing a multinational presence into the theater needs to be addressed.''

It remained possible that the destruction of the headquarters would do nothing to resolve the old stalemate. But comments like Sir Emyr's made it clear that bargaining might soften the positions of some countries.

In their morning meeting, Mr. Annan stressed to Mr. Powell the need for agreement among the Security Council's permanent members before any proposal was formally issued. Later, in remarks to reporters, Mr. Annan distanced himself from Mr. Powell by suggesting that the answer to Iraq's security needs might be an international force mandated by the United Nations.

An error has occurred. Please try again later.

You are already subscribed to this email.

But, as he stood by Mr. Powell, Mr. Annan also made it clear he did not see any role for a more traditional United Nations peacekeeping force. And Mr. Powell parried questions about a multinational force by saying that Iraq already has one, pointing out that troops from 30 nations are present in Iraq.

Several envoys, in remarks to the Security Council or in conversations with reporters in the corridors outside, suggested possible areas in which the United States might make some concessions. One was to set out a timetable for withdrawal or for the establishment of a completely independent, elected Iraqi government.

Sergey Lavrov, the Russian ambassador, spoke for many when he said ''all of us wish a stronger and more active role of the United Nations.'' And he stressed the importance of creating ''a political process and a clear timetable for restoration of sovereignty of Iraq.''

But Scott McClellan, President Bush's press secretary, swiftly rejected an expanded United Nations role in the political development of Iraq. ''This is an effort that is led by the Coalition Provisional Authority and that's where it stands,'' he told The Associated Press in an interview on Air Force One as he accompanied President Bush to Oregon.

The Council meeting today was called long before the bombing, to hear the United States and Britain report on the situation in Iraq.

Mr. Duclos, the French envoy, also suggested that the financial situation in Iraq was opaque. ''We agree to participate in the donors' conference in October,'' he said, ''only if the international community is totally informed about the use made by the coalition of Iraq's financial and oil revenues.''

But security issues loomed larger than financial or political ones. A former American ambassador to the United Nations, Richard C. Holbrooke, said in a telephone interview yesterday that one solution might be to have Norwegian soldiers form the core of a international force.

''I think Kofi Annan's suggestion of a multinational force which is separate from but closely related to the overall American command is the way to square this impossible circle and allow other countries to participate while preserving America's central role,'' he said. He added that Norway was ideal for such a role, as it is both a trusted NATO ally and one of the earliest and strongest supporters of the United Nations.